Cases 111 - 120 of 1,086
Sanchez v. Cisneros et al
as 3:2022cv01159
Petitioner:
Josue Israel Sanchez
Respondent:
T. Cisneros and Rob Bonta
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Sanchez v. Lumpkin
as 22-20391
Petitioner / Appellant:
Juan Ismael Sanchez
Respondent / Appellee:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Lopez v. Derr
as 1:2022cv00316
Petitioner:
Elvin Sanchez Lopez
Respondent:
Warden Estela Derr
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Nazario Cruz-Sanchez v. Unknown
as 22-55703
Petitioner / Appellant:
NAZARIO E. CRUZ-SANCHEZ
Respondent / Appellee:
UNKNOWN
Manuel Sanchez v. Raybon Johnson
as 22-55695
Petitioner / Appellant:
MANUEL RUBEN SANCHEZ
Respondent / Appellee:
RAYBON C. JOHNSON, Warden
Sanchez v. Cohen et al (INMATE 1)
as 2:2022cv00417
Plaintiff:
Gilberto Sanchez
Defendant:
Alan Cohen, Federal Bureau of Prisons and United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Caballero v. Lumpkin et al
as 2:2022cv00155
Petitioner:
Juan L Caballero
Respondent:
Bobby Lumpkin and Jerry Sanchez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Sanchez Veliz v. Stone
as 3:2022cv00067
Petitioner:
Jose Sebastian Sanchez Veliz
Respondent:
Stacey N. Stone
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Sanchez v. FCI Berlin, Warden
as 1:2022fp00231
Petitioner:
Fernando Sanchez
Respondent:
FCI Berlin, Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Donaldson v. Lumpkin
as 5:2022cv00635
Petitioner:
Eric Wayne Donaldson
Respondent:
Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Warden FNU Sanchez and Bobby Lumpkin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
